On Friday when I wrote about the success of the food truck talks I said that I had always had a dream that Sacramento could be an example for other cities. But I guess my statement might have been misleading. My happiness of the day was for the fact that we came to a compromise that makes things better than the silly 30 minute rule we have now. The new ordinances are far from being glorious examples for everywhere. I understand the need for a government to have ordinances, but still...

First off, there's still the distance rule from restaurants. I am a firm believer that - if your restaurant can't compete against a food truck, you shouldn't be in business. Seriously, if a restaurant's food and service isn't enough to keep the customers coming in, they need to reassess themselves and stop blaming a nearby food truck. 

I still argue that there are the customers who are in the mood for sitting down being served, drinking alcohol, and lounging with friends. They are different than the customer who hasn't got a lot of time or money to spend and wants to grab something from a truck. Sure a person can be both, but on any given day they are one or the other.

I think a private property owner should be able to have a truck park on their property and see no reason for there to be a "no return rule for 72 hours" except that it was a compromise with the restaurant/business owners.

What I am super excited about is the pilot of up to five food pods. There's already a property picked with so many possibilities. The plans call for something that, done properly, could create a pod that can be an example for other cities. More on that at a later date.

Cities throughout California and the country struggle with food truck ordinances. Every day there are news articles on this city or that talking about them. Restaurant owners complain in every city or town.  In California, there have been lawsuits because State law actually trumps local law so that, in reality, cities have no right to make ordinances for anything except for health and safety. Cities have already lost battles in court because there are no health and safety reasons for distance from a restaurant.

But Cities don't like lawsuits and trucks (and the public) want change sooner rather than later. That means compromise.  Compromise means that not everyone is happy and got what they wanted, but they can live with a deal. Friday's ordinance deal will be reviewed at certain marks in the future. Things can always change. 

So to be clear, the new Sacramento ordinances aren't perfect and aren't shining examples for the State or country, but they are better than what we have now.

When I started writing about the food truck industry/trend two years ago I had a silly dream. That, starting with a blank slate and using bits and pieces of ordinances from other cities, Sacramento could piece together the best set of ordinances in the State. As the Capitol, that we could be an example for other cities to look at in this nationwide struggle of food trucks, restaurants, and Cities across the nation.

Six months ago I would have told you it was never going to happen. That all sides were at a stalemate and nothing was getting accomplished. Every meeting that we had, the same arguments were being hashed out again and again. I think a big turning point was when discussions started to take place with Councilmen Shenirer and Fong getting involved. And, although some may not agree, I personally think part of it did have to do with the break off of the NorCal (now CalMFA) trucks from SactoMoFo.

God willing and fingers crossed, we will have some great, new ordinances in place this fall. Today we left a City meeting in record time - just over an hour. All sides were happy. I even hugged Randy Paragary and told him that I was happy that I could stop my personal boycott of his restaurants. I say fingers crossed because it's not legit yet. We still have to formally go to the City's Law & Legislation Committee and then on to the full City Council. The timelime looks to be Law & Leg on September 18th and then Council a few weeks after that.

I will provide a quick summation of what was agreed upon. This does not include lots of detail items that will be built into the language.

Currently the situation is that trucks can only be at a street location for 30 minutes at a time. They have not been allowed on private property at all - even if the owner gave the O.K.

The City has been split into zones. There is a long swath through the Grid of J, K, and L streets.  In that zone they can stay 1.5 hours and must be 400 feet from another restaurant. The rest of the Grid and City is 2.5 hours on the street, with distance differences per zone.

Regarding private property, they can now go (with owners permission) for 5 hours total and no truck can return to that location for 72 hours. If there is a special event, there can be waivers.

Here's the one I have been championing since the beginning - food pods! There will be a pilot of up to 5 food pods throughout the City. For those unfamiliar, it's like a food court for trucks. A private property is built up with amenities such as seating, ATM, bathrooms, wifi, etc. Trucks can safely park there for a shift or all day. They become happening, hip places to hang out. Such pods are popular in Portland and Austin where they have been shown to decrease crime and increase property values. (To see pictures of the SF SOMA Streatfood Pod, click the link.)
My piece, "Mobile Food Pods Revitalize Neighborhoods" here.

The Sacramento food pods must be run by an Association. That's an important reason why the CalMFA was formed. Association(s) will be in charge of scheduling and maintaining the pods.

All of these items and ordinances will be reviewed at a six month and one year mark.

Perhaps my dream is coming true! Especially when you see the first food pod being developed. Maybe my dream of being a model for the State can be extended to be a model for the nation. Wouldn't that be nice?

Please read part 2: More Thoughts on Food Truck Ordinances

As SactoMoFo 5 approaches on Saturday, it seemed only fitting that I write a post related to my favorite Bay area truck, Hapa SF. 

If you know your Hawaiian pidgin, "hapa" means "half-caste" or "of mixed descent". Therefore, I would be a hapa since I am half Filipino and half British. In the case of Hapa SF, the truck specializes in contemporary Filipino food. As their website says, "Our focus is to tantalize your taste buds with our innovative take on classic Filipino cuisine."

Whenever I see them I have to go and get a plate of sisig, a pork dish that any pork lover would crave. Then William Pilz,  Hapa SF's chef and owner, gave a sisig recipe to Chow.com for printing. I pinned that sucker onto my Pinterest board right away with a goal to make it.

I should have gotten more local trucks, but the crowds and lighting under the freeway sometimes made things difficult. This is my first complex video using titles, captions, music, and mixed media. Hope you like it.

One thing I noticed the last two SactoMoFos is that the lines are crazy from 11 to 3, but then from 3 to 6 there's really not an issue - short or no lines at all. The trade-off, the best stuff is sold out. So it's up to each person to decide - brave lines for the best food or wait til later for the shorter lines but slimmer pickings.

This week the California food trucks and food truck lovers were outraged to learn that Assemblyman Bill Monning from Carmel had introduced Assembly Bill 1678. This bill would essentially ban food trucks within 1,500 feet of any elementary and secondary school from the hours of 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. And we aren't talking just 1,500 feet from the school building, but from the school property line. We all know how big some school campuses can be.

Why is AB 1678 ridiculous?

First, I find it rather interesting that Monning is from Carmel where I doubt they have more than one or two food trucks at all. What experience does he have with the modern food truck movement? How does his smaller constituency and district have any comparison to the major cities were the food truck movement is really taking place and where the urban landscape is completely different than his own?  My guess - the major city representatives knew better than to sponsor this bill and so it got handed off for Monning to put his name on it. 

Nutrition

The idea is that we are supposed to be ensuring that school children are getting fed nutritional food. Yet they still consider pizza a vegetable because of the tomato sauce on it?  How about the McDonald's and the doughnut shop that's just a block away from the school? Are they serving nutritional food? With Monning's logic he should be writing legislation forcing the fast food places to serve only nutritional food from 6-6 if they are walking distance from a school. 

In reality the gourmet food trucks are selling foods made from whole, not processed, ingredients. They are buying fresh ingredients daily from many local farms and vendors. Monning is generalizing all trucks back to the 'roach coach' versions that still roam the streets. For him to blame all the trucks for poor quality food is unfair. The gourmet level trucks, in many cases, can be argued to be selling better quality food than some school cafeterias.

How is a fresh gyro made with lots of fresh produce and meat on a flatbread worse than a cafeteria's chicken nuggets?  How are burgers made by hand from quality ground beef bought from the best purveyors worse than a preformed burger patty made from scraped remnants from lower quality beef? 

Distance

The biggest problem with this bill is the 1,500 food distance. 1,500 feet is almost one third of a mile or equal to about 4 city blocks in Sacramento. That, in some ways, is not that great a distance, but when you use a map and draw circles around all the schools, you actually cover a lot of area.  The distance is 360 degrees around the school's property lines and you have to include elementary, middle, junior high, and high schools. You also have to include ALL schools - public and private. That's a lot of schools. Here is a map that shows how it effects Sacramento. It's really bad for cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco where it pretty much wipes out anywhere for the trucks to roam.

Meanwhile there are plenty of brick and mortar places such as pot dispensaries, liquor stores, mini-markets, and, of course, fast food places all within the same distance. How is it different for a child to walk to the corner 7-11 to buy a Mountain Dew, Doritos, and Skittles than to a food truck for well-made sandwich?

Monning says it is unsafe for children to be walking off from campus. Well many schools are already closed campuses where the children are not supposed to leave anyway. Why punish office workers and laborers in the area from enjoying truck food?

AB 1678 is a classic poorly written, un-researched, politically motivated, industry subsidized bill. It needs to be killed.


Social media has worked against the banks, Verizon, Komen, and more. Let's make it work for the food trucks, who love and use social media for their livelihood. Let social media save their businesses.